Rebels lose, Ukraine stays united

Go to page

Go to page

Go to page

ADC

As I have noted there are other possibilities
- the brother of gen.Asapov was not interviewed at all. And Reuters just forged the story.
- the brother was asked about mission of gen.Asapov in Syria. And Reuters falsely attributed his words to Ukraine.
- the brother could not understnd properly (via telephone) the question and could be sure that he was asked about Syria, not Ukraine.

Yes, I don't deny that gen.Asapov could or could not visit Ukraine. It is not established. We don't have alternative sources that confirm the story. So it remains merely an allegation.

Balance of probabilities is a form to express private opinions, estimates, suppositions, allegations. Of course you have right for your own opinion and your obedient servant has it as well.

There is an interesting detail. Reuters claims that general's brother was allegedly interviewed in September 2017. The allegations that the article in Reuters contains were presented by Ukrainian MoD also in September 2017. So why it (this information) was not published in September 2017?

ACCOMMODATING RUSSIA IS NOT GOING TO WORK
The “realist“ view of Russia as a “great power” is not only analytically unconvincing. It is also leading to problematic policy recommendations. For “realists,“ accepting a Russian sphere of influence is the way ahead. The West should make clear to Russia that NATO and EU are not going to be enlarged further east. It should accommodate Russia by accepting that the post-Soviet space (minus the Baltic countries) is the sphere of Russian influence, and not challenge Russia there.

Appeasement hasn't worked in the past ie between 1991 and 2014 the policy was to accomodate Russia, but they

First, it has not worked in the past. Accommodation of Russia has been, de facto, the policy the West has pursued from the breakup of the Soviet Union 1991 until 2014 when the West reacted to Russian aggression against Ukraine with sanctions. Out of all the successor states of the Soviet Union, only Russia got the West’s real attention. Russia’s claim to inherit the UN Security Council Seat from the Soviet Union and its nuclear weapons has been supported by the West. America and Europe have put their hopes on a strong Russia that would transform into a liberal democracy and a market economy over time. The West has not objected to Russia’s use of military force in the post-Soviet space as a tool to keep other countries unstable and dependent on Moscow (especially Moldova and Georgia). American and European leaders have seen Russia as the key partner and interlocutor, accepting Moscow’s view of the “near abroad“ as a sphere of influence, or better, sphere of control. This approach has failed, not because of Western meddling but because of Russia’s inability to produce a stable environment. The way Russia has exerted influence in the post-Soviet space—through intimidation, use of military power, support for corrupt leaders— has provoked resistance. Russian influence has been, in Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Armenia, a major obstacle to economic and political modernization. Reformers in these countries turned to the West for help: to counterbalance Russian influence and to support their reform agendas.

In other words, the conflicts between Russia and post-Soviet countries are homegrown. They are not going to disappear if the West decides to abandon the approach of limited engagement it has pursued with reform-minded countries in the post-Soviet space. If the West cuts those relationships in order to accommodate Russia, the result is likely to be more conflict and desperation in those countries, leading either to more war or emigration; certainly not to stability.

Provided the agency “Reuters” news agency a formal apology to Syria, after having rigged images transferred from the archive attribute to the events of Syrian Interior. The author was one of the programs in the TV France had been transferred Sunday on Reuters photographs claimed to have addressed the internal events in Syria was forced Reuters to apologize to Syria.

The Reuters display pictures specializes in Lebanese affairs as pictures of events in Syria, but the facts have emerged rapidly, forcing the “Reuters” to apologize to Syria because of this scandal is not the first for the “Reuters” after he had previously published photographs artificial than many other countries as it did in Iran in the period that followed the elections in Iran in 2009, and was last done by working hard to exaggerate the events of Syria through the dissemination of false news and pictures from the archive dating back mainly to countries other than Syria after it claimed to have belonged to the Syrian demonstrations in the city of Dara.

ADC

The revelation came after the Western states and armed rebel groups embarked on butchering pro-government civilians in two separate areas and intended to project the blame on President Bashar al-Assad’s government, but they failed.

LE

As I have noted there are other possibilities
- the brother of gen.Asapov was not interviewed at all. And Reuters just forged the story.
- the brother was asked about mission of gen.Asapov in Syria. And Reuters falsely attributed his words to Ukraine.
- the brother could not understnd properly (via telephone) the question and could be sure that he was asked about Syria, not Ukraine.

Yes, I don't deny that gen.Asapov could or could not visit Ukraine. It is not established. We don't have alternative sources that confirm the story. So it remains merely an allegation.

Balance of probabilities is a form to express private opinions, estimates, suppositions, allegations. Of course you have right for your own opinion and your obedient servant has it as well.

There is an interesting detail. Reuters claims that general's brother was allegedly interviewed in September 2017. The allegations that the article in Reuters contains were presented by Ukrainian MoD also in September 2017. So why it (this information) was not published in September 2017?

You always do this. Dissecting statements or news items as though you're a barrister in court but instead of facts, you use the technique of doubt casting and using improbable arguments.

As with the MH17 when you tried to argue against the BUK being fired by the separatists side and claiming it was possible for it to have been shot down by a Ukrainian plane, and as with the events around the capture of Savchenko and allegations that she was involved in the deaths of journalists, you're doing the same again with this one.

LE

So you deny that Reuters used falsehoods just because you don't like the source (frankly speaking randomly picked by me). OK. Let's look at another sourceReuters admits altering Beirut photo
Or maybe it is Zionist propaganda?

@TheIronDuke: Russian or any other trolls tend to be dealt with using weapons Russia can never hope to deploy.
Humour Irony Intelligence Knowlege

ADC

Sorry Gents I have not been paying attention is this thing still ongoing?

'There is much to learn from the British: their reticence about disclosing details, their clear expertise in human intelligence, their non-hysterical reaction to very real threats. Many Americans may have an inferiority complex about things British -- the refinement, the style and, of course, those accents' -

ADC

It’s not like you to be unaware of Russian global politics. Your previously quoted newspaper seems to think so: Fred Weir: Politics over peace? Critics say Ukraine’s president sidelining Minsk accords. - Russia News Now
I suppose it comes down to what do you mean by ‘still going on’? Minsk 2 is not being met by either side and those who want Crimea to be a part of Russia would be more than happy that it goes away, forgotten about. I suppose Putin could comply with Minsk 2 and allow the U.N. to police the border between Ukraine and Russia but it’s not going to happen. So yes, still going on with injuries sustained on both sides.

You can take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. However, you can bl**dy well make it wish it had!

ADC

Genuinely been focused elsewhere, Russkies ref Central Asia, China, Syria, Iran, Turkey yes but the buggers do get around and I cannot be looking everywhere, although I am certain they don't own the Donald.

Thanks for the answer.

'There is much to learn from the British: their reticence about disclosing details, their clear expertise in human intelligence, their non-hysterical reaction to very real threats. Many Americans may have an inferiority complex about things British -- the refinement, the style and, of course, those accents' -

ADC

Genuinely been focused elsewhere, Russkies ref Central Asia, China, Syria, Iran, Turkey yes but the buggers do get around and I cannot be looking everywhere, although I am certain they don't own the Donald.

LE

At last you admit something obvious.
And not one news-source is absolutely perfect. So for this or that reason Reuters could present false information in our case. It can not be excluded.
In our case with gen.Asapov who was killed by terrorist in Syria we see this informational chain
1. Just after his death Ukrainian MoD (its intelligent services) published allegations about his involvement in the war in Donbass. That time Reuters allegedly interviewed brother of the general. Most likely it was done by Marina Tsvetkova. But that time Reuters did not publish the allegations because the main source was apparently biased.
2. Four months later Marita Tsvetkova published an article in Reuters-Russian web-site where she presented her fairy tale about 5 rebels that 'independently' confirmed word-by-word allegation made by Ukrainian MoD.
3. Immediately an article in English appeared in Reuters English web-site and international MSM began to quote it as a primary source while primary source is Ukrainian MoD.
It is typical fake news forgery technology that includes reference to unnamed persons and concealment of real primary source.

@TheIronDuke: Russian or any other trolls tend to be dealt with using weapons Russia can never hope to deploy.
Humour Irony Intelligence Knowlege

ADC

At last you admit something obvious.
And not one news-source is absolutely perfect. So for this or that reason Reuters could present false information in our case. It can not be excluded.
In our case with gen.Asapov who was killed by terrorist in Syria we see this informational chain
1. Just after his death Ukrainian MoD (its intelligent services) published allegations about his involvement in the war in Donbass. That time Reuters allegedly interviewed brother of the general. Most likely it was done by Marina Tsvetkova. But that time Reuters did not publish the allegations because the main source was apparently biased.
2. Four months later Marita Tsvetkova published an article in Reuters-Russian web-site where she presented her fairy tale about 5 rebels that 'independently' confirmed word-by-word allegation made by Ukrainian MoD.
3. Immediately an article in English appeared in Reuters English web-site and international MSM began to quote it as a primary source while primary source is Ukrainian MoD.
It is typical fake news forgery technology that includes reference to unnamed persons and concealment of real primary source.